Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition for Lack of Apparent Error. Review Petition Fails as Grounds Did Not Establish Any Error Apparent on Record.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court of India addressed a review petition concerning Civil Appeal Nos. 2575 of 2020, filed by Rajenbhai Baldevbhai Shah against Baijiben Kabhaibhai Patanwadia and others. The court noted that the matter had been previously dealt with extensively in its judgment dated 15.06.2020. The petitioners sought to have the review petition listed in open court, which was rejected. The court condoned the delay in filing the review petition but ultimately found that the grounds presented did not reveal any error apparent on the record that would justify interference with the earlier judgment. Therefore, the review petition was dismissed. The decision was made by Justices Uday Umesh Lalit, Ajay Rastogi, and A.S. Bopanna on 25th August 2022.

Headnote

A) Review Jurisdiction - Grounds for Review - Error Apparent on Record - Supreme Court of India, 2022 - The court found that the grounds presented in the review petition did not establish any error apparent on the record that would warrant interference with the previous judgment. Consequently, the review petition was dismissed. Held that the application for listing the review petition in open court was rejected, and the delay in filing was condoned (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the review petition demonstrated any error apparent on the record to justify interference.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition, finding no error apparent on the record to justify interference with the previous judgment.

Law Points

  • Review jurisdiction
  • grounds for review
  • error apparent on record
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (08) 173

Review Petition (C) No. of 2022 (Diary No.5150 of 2021)

2022-08-25

Uday Umesh Lalit, Ajay Rastogi, A.S. Bopanna

Rajenbhai Baldevbhai Shah

Baijiben Kabhaibhai Patanwadia and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Review petition against a previous judgment

Remedy Sought

Listing of review petition in open court

Filing Reason

To challenge the previous judgment dated 15.06.2020

Previous Decisions

Judgment and order dated 15.06.2020 extensively dealt with the controversy

Issues

Whether the review petition demonstrated any error apparent on the record

Submissions/Arguments

Grounds for review did not establish any error Application for listing in open court was rejected

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized that a review petition must demonstrate an error apparent on the record to warrant interference with a prior judgment.

Judgment Excerpts

Application seeking listing of review petition in open Court is rejected. The grounds taken in review petition do not make out any error apparent on record to justify interference.

Procedural History

The review petition was filed after the judgment and order dated 15.06.2020, seeking to challenge that decision.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Conversion Permission Under Section 44 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 — Deemed Permission Granted Due to Delay. Failure to Obtain No-Objection Certificates Not a Valid Ground for Rejection After Expiry of 90-Day Per...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Execution Order in Landlord-Tenant Dispute — Delays in Execution Proceedings Condemned. The executing court's authority is limited to execution matters and cannot revisit prior orders unless jurisdiction is challenged.